[HN Gopher] Human Accelerated Region 1
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Human Accelerated Region 1
        
       Author : apollinaire
       Score  : 113 points
       Date   : 2026-04-17 03:55 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
        
       | red75prime wrote:
       | Interesting. So, the human brain is the scaled-up monkey brain
       | with significant architectural changes.
        
         | samrus wrote:
         | Implies intelligent design
         | 
         | I think its rather some mutations that produced more reelin and
         | created the most successful animal in earth's history
        
           | borborigmus wrote:
           | So Steely Dan documented this first?
        
           | Miraltar wrote:
           | The most successful animal by what metric?
        
             | menno-dot-ai wrote:
             | Tetris high scores, obviously
        
             | totomz wrote:
             | Some of us don't spend days looking for food, don't die of
             | cold, and survive the flu...
             | 
             | aaand we have Quake and Comand&Conquer - Red Alert
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | > aaand we have Quake and Comand&Conquer - Red Alert
               | 
               | Agreed, it would seem that evolutionary biology peaked in
               | the late 90s then
        
               | randallsquared wrote:
               | As related in the documentary _The Matrix_.
        
             | Nevermark wrote:
             | The most successful at communicating their view that they
             | are the most successful. Whether they are or not. But that
             | means they are. By that metric.
             | 
             | Has another animal proposed they are more successful by a
             | different metric?
             | 
             | Crickets?
        
               | robbomacrae wrote:
               | You sound like you've never been disdainfully stared at
               | by a cat..
               | 
               | Really interesting article though. I'm very hopeful AI
               | can help work out how all these things interact.
        
               | pegasus wrote:
               | So, the most successful at arrogance? In other words, the
               | least successful at humility? Ironically, since humble
               | and human share a common root. Just playing devil's
               | advocate here, but what you propose is not a good metric
               | to maximize.
        
               | vintermann wrote:
               | > The most successful at communicating their view that
               | they are the most successful
               | 
               | To who? Other humans?
               | 
               | It's seagull mating season where I am, and I don't speak
               | seagull, but I'm pretty sure one of the things they're
               | trying to convey to their fellow seagulls is that they're
               | _extremely_ successful.
               | 
               | Can't argue with it either. They're very much alive,
               | which is the best you can be in this particular
               | competition.
        
               | dingdongditchme wrote:
               | Corn, albeit not an animal has been pretty successful in
               | terms of number of individuals. Their bi-pedal underlings
               | have cleared swathes of land and take meticulous care of
               | their well-being so they can bask in the sun undisturbed.
        
               | ArekDymalski wrote:
               | Until they are cut down and bombarded with micro waves by
               | the very same bi-pedal underlings.
        
             | WarmWash wrote:
             | Mother nature hates weak things that die (that's why they
             | get eliminated), so if we can make it to interplanetary
             | species before killing ourselves, that would be a pretty
             | huge sign of success. At least on mother natures benchmark.
        
           | woadwarrior01 wrote:
           | Merely implies a very good fitness function.
        
             | littlestymaar wrote:
             | Yes. Though according this fitness function we're not
             | necessarily more successful than a jellyfish or a tapeworm.
        
               | somewhatgoated wrote:
               | Arguably much less successful since jellyfish have been
               | around 700+ million years ands it's not clear if humans
               | will make it even the next couple thousand. But the jury
               | is still out on that one
        
           | Joker_vD wrote:
           | I'd really rather liked it if that supposedly "intelligent"
           | designer took a bit more time at designing the urogenital
           | tract of human males.
        
             | shmeeed wrote:
             | What's wrong with it?
        
               | MyelinatedT wrote:
               | Separation of functions/concerns is not great, for
               | starters.
               | 
               | The testes are dangerously exposed, the plumbing is
               | convoluted and failure-prone (and doesn't recover well
               | from mechanical insults).
               | 
               | The prostate, which serves no function outside of
               | reproduction, lies inline with the urethra and quite
               | consistently loses flexibility and becomes enlarged with
               | age, causing all sorts of structural issues impacting
               | basic urological function.
               | 
               | Female reproductive vs urinary anatomy is largely
               | physiologically distinct (proximity and UTI risk
               | notwithstanding). Though plenty of room for improvement
               | there too -- starting with endometrial tissue being far
               | too prolific. Fun fact: endometrial tissue can migrate to
               | the brain and cause haemorrhaging in severe cases of
               | endometriosis.
               | 
               | Plenty of room for improvement across the board, I'd say!
        
             | hackrmn wrote:
             | Hey, $DEITY did its absolute best with the constraints and
             | the requirements. But hey, can't please everyone
             | apparently. Be happy you can relieve yourself well past the
             | intended warranty period. The parts were designed to be
             | easily _aftermarket_ replaceable with sufficient advances
             | in technology, retaining the fundamental design without
             | changes.
        
             | lexicality wrote:
             | I'd like it if the vagus nerve didn't do a loop around my
             | neck for no particular reason. (Giraffes would probably
             | like that even more)
        
               | dingdongditchme wrote:
               | Is that a big concern? I've been pretty happy with my
               | vagus nerve functionality until now... although I have
               | not given it much thought to be fair.
        
               | _joel wrote:
               | I'm going to stick my neck out and say no.
        
             | codeulike wrote:
             | mine seems ok what version are you on
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Y'all get firmware updates?!
        
               | ccozan wrote:
               | I hope we don't vibe-evoluate....
        
               | ahartmetz wrote:
               | It's actually worse, but with robust unit tests.
        
           | incognito124 wrote:
           | I fail to see that, it's simply one of all other random
           | mutations, it's just that this one has a big downstream
           | effect of enabling other more complex mutations
        
           | nurettin wrote:
           | Intelligent mutations? How does that work?
        
           | kryptiskt wrote:
           | You're positing the existence of a far more advanced lifeform
           | than merely a clever monkey with pretensions, which then
           | somehow created said monkeys. That's like saying that it's
           | easy to become a millionaire, just start with a billion
           | dollars.
           | 
           | That's not an explanation, you just replaced a problem with
           | another harder one.
        
         | utopiah wrote:
         | What was the alternative?
        
           | red75prime wrote:
           | Scaling-up without significant architectural changes.
        
             | mapleoin wrote:
             | Or significant architectural changes without scaling up.
        
               | Nevermark wrote:
               | Or a single magic mutation.
               | 
               | And if we ran an experiment where we gave it to some
               | apes...
        
               | cluckindan wrote:
               | Let's observe their reactions to a big slab of obsidian.
        
               | sudb wrote:
               | huh, I always assumed they were metal-clad objects with
               | something inside
               | 
               | wikipedia tells me they are machines, but not what
               | they're made of
        
               | ahartmetz wrote:
               | Like birds, let's say? There have been some articles on
               | HN about how crows can be so intelligent with such a
               | small (absolute size) brain.
        
           | curiousObject wrote:
           | Evolution would design the alternative to be something
           | slightly less capable than the minimum. /s
           | 
           | Really, the likelihood is that these mutations must have had
           | an impact that far outweighs their space in the genome.
           | 
           | That's how all our close competition got murdered by Homo
           | Sapiens. Just significant difference in mental abilities.
        
           | lukeify wrote:
           | We didn't have any. The project manager set it at 3 story
           | points.
        
         | tclancy wrote:
         | Which is why we think we're the center of the universe.
        
         | timdiggerm wrote:
         | What did you think it was before you read this brief Wikipedia
         | article?
        
         | xattt wrote:
         | There has to be a car analogy for this.
        
         | graemep wrote:
         | Of course it is, and you could say the same with regard to
         | mammalian brains in general. However the divergence starts very
         | early in development (seven weeks) so is very big and very
         | significant. By the time a human is born the brain is very
         | different from a monkey's.
        
       | yubblegum wrote:
       | > HAR1A is active in the developing human brain between the 7th
       | and 18th gestational weeks.
       | 
       | Anyone know of a resource that layouts the temporal activation
       | patterns for all the genes for the life cycle of a human being?
        
         | bonsai_spool wrote:
         | This can't be done reliably but you may want to look at Tabula
         | Sapiens which doe some of what you'd like. It's not an obvious
         | problem in lots of ways.
        
           | yubblegum wrote:
           | Thanks. Suprised no one has made a visualization (even if it
           | has gaps).
           | 
           | > It's not an obvious problem in lots of ways.
           | 
           | Care to expand on this?
           | 
           | Link for others:
           | 
           | https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl4896
           | 
           | https://maayanlab.cloud/Harmonizome/dataset/Tabula+Sapiens+G.
           | ..
        
             | bonsai_spool wrote:
             | I think people who aren't already experts in this aren't
             | the right ones to try. For experts, the technical questions
             | are very evident.
             | 
             | You may also like GTEX and the Human Protein Atlas (which
             | also has gene expression data)
        
         | tgbugs wrote:
         | Let's assume that you mean activation patterns at the level of
         | single cells. Aside from the ethical issues which make it
         | virtually impossible to obtain the full set of data, there is
         | also the fact that the exact timing of expression is one of the
         | major ways in which development produces variability in
         | phenotype and so can vary wildly between individuals. The
         | closest we have right now might be HUBMAP [0] or HCA [1], but I
         | don't think that those had as objectives covering multiple
         | developmental timepoints.
         | 
         | 0. https://portal.hubmapconsortium.org/ 1.
         | https://data.humancellatlas.org/
        
           | yubblegum wrote:
           | Thanks!
        
           | stenl wrote:
           | My group published a cell atlas of the developing human brain
           | in 2023, giving gene expression in single cells from
           | postconception week 5 to 13. It's on github:
           | https://github.com/linnarsson-lab/developing-human-brain
           | 
           | The NIH BRAIN initiative is working on the next generation of
           | that, covering more timepoints and better spatial data.
        
         | flufluflufluffy wrote:
         | As others have said, a complete dataset for that is basically
         | impossible. You would have to monitor every cell type in an
         | individual from the moment of conception until death. Maybe in
         | a couple hundred years we'll have nanotech robots that could do
         | that, and our overall morals and ideas of what constitutes
         | ethical research will have changed enough that we allow the
         | creation of such humans with these robots inside them.
        
         | liquid_thyme wrote:
         | There are various types of triggers for gene activation, some
         | genes turn on/off all the time (housekeeping), some follow the
         | circadian rythm, some are immediate response, some are specific
         | to specific phases of cell division, some are persistently on
         | all the time, etc ,etc. Not sure what type of chart you're
         | looking for.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-04-17 23:01 UTC)